How come in Japan where they are truly serious about having no guns in the hands of anyone are there only about two murders a year? Oh wait you can't answer that because it points to guns. No guns makes it physically impossible to shoot someone with a bullet. Why is it that a country the size of california has such a low murder rate and also a gun prohibition? If there are no guns around for people to protect themselves, how are the murderers held at bay?

Your turn genius.

This is not Japan, different customs beliefs and values. The youth in Japan probably have respect for thier elders for example as well as for fellow countrymen. Respect for one another in the U.S. seems to be non existent these days.

This is not Japan, different customs beliefs and values. The youth in Japan probably have respect for thier elders for example as well as for fellow countrymen. Respect for one another in the U.S. seems to be non existent these days.

That's a stereotype. I see you are also ignorant in more than one way.

I can see from your inability to explain that phenomenon that you just don't want to admit that no guns equals no people getting shot. Hmmm 5 guys locked in a room for a year, all with guns and five guys locked in a room for a year without guns... Which group is most likely to shoot each other, the one with guns or the ones without? hmmmm that's a tough one.

Japan has one of the most violent histories and cultures on the planet, just like us.

I would be interested in knowing the specifics to these types of accidents. Was it impairment? related to drugs or booze? Did they leave a loaded gun laying around because they forgot to put it away? Or were they just clowning around and being stupid? was the safety on? or does this not matter to you because it again points to the person(s) involved and not the gun.

If you want to know specifics, then you'll spend the rest of your life doing case research, since there are tens of thousands of accidental gun deaths per year in the US. So, no, it doesn't really matter to me, whether one wants to play the "people kill people" game or not. There's a responsible way to store and handle guns; if only everyone took it seriously. Guns are the common denominator in all sorts of deadly trends within this great country of ours. So, regale me all you want about the ease which which you could slit my throat or hit me in the head with a hammer, or how bad of a shot you are, but guns are inescapably part of the problem. The NRA and their allies will therefore throw everything against the wall as a possible solution (including suggestions of what they would otherwise call socialized medicine, and banning of certain entertainment media at the expense of their otherwise cherished first amendment rights), so long as nobody comes near the subject of gun regulation.

Which group is most likely to shoot each other, the one with guns or the ones without?"

Neither.

wrong. people without guns are unable to shoot each other. people with guns have that ability, so, hypothetically, they are more likely to shoot each other, simply because they have the means. doesn't mean they will, but it's impossible for unarmed people to shoot anyone. simple logic. :)

If you want to know specifics, then you'll spend the rest of your life doing case research, since there are tens of thousands of accidental gun deaths per year in the US. So, no, it doesn't really matter to me, whether one wants to play the "people kill people" game or not. There's a responsible way to store and handle guns; if only everyone took it seriously. Guns are the common denominator in all sorts of deadly trends within this great country of ours. So, regale me all you want about the ease which which you could slit my throat or hit me in the head with a hammer, or how bad of a shot you are, but guns are inescapably part of the problem. The NRA and their allies will therefore throw everything against the wall as a possible solution (including suggestions of what they would otherwise call socialized medicine, and banning of certain entertainment media at the expense of their otherwise cherished first amendment rights), so long as nobody comes near the subject of gun regulation.

CDC 2011 puts accidental gun deaths at 850. However accidental gun injuries (in 2001) were about 20,000. Over all I ballpark the stats as follows: 50,000 intentional gun injuries(legal and illegal)20,000 accidental gun injuries20,000 suicides by guns10,000 intentional gun Deaths (legal and illegal)850 accidental gun deaths101,000 people hurt or killed out of 300 million.People kill people, guns make it easy for people to kill people. Don't get me wrong. There is a problem in America. Guns have very little to do with it. If I could live in a gun free world I would. If gunpowder was never invented I'd be very happy. If only 'cause I wouldn't have to hear ya'll cry over an item you know jack about.

I wonder when we have armed enough people and stockpiled enough guns to make the right feel safe?

It will never happen. It's a self defeating notion. Because as long as you are allowed guns, you know everyone else has guns. So then you will always need one more gun, just to be safe, and make sure that you have more than everyone else.

These debates are always amusing to watch. In Canada, we get almost the identical tv shows and movies that you do in the US. The only difference is our news programming, and enough Canadian programming to satisfy Canadian content laws. Yet for some reason, the violent movies and tv shows don't drive us to the same level of violence. There are two main differences that I can see at the root of this: 1. We have gun control. 2. We have a strong safety net to help reduce the harshness of poverty, and to pay for any health care costs.

And somehow, those two differences allow Canadians to leave their doors unlocked when they are home during the day, while their American neighbours feel the need to barricade their doors, and stock up on rounds for their AK-47s.

CDC 2011 puts accidental gun deaths at 850. However accidental gun injuries (in 2001) were about 20,000. Over all I ballpark the stats as follows: 50,000 intentional gun injuries(legal and illegal)20,000 accidental gun injuries20,000 suicides by guns10,000 intentional gun Deaths (legal and illegal)850 accidental gun deaths101,000 people hurt or killed out of 300 million.People kill people, guns make it easy for people to kill people. Don't get me wrong. There is a problem in America. Guns have very little to do with it. If I could live in a gun free world I would. If gunpowder was never invented I'd be very happy. If only 'cause I wouldn't have to hear ya'll cry over an item you know jack about.

I suspect that a lot of anti gun people out there base thier opinions on personal experiences involving guns. That would explain the "just get rid of them" cries without supporting any other solutions/options. I mean if that's the case you certainly can't blame them.

I suspect that a lot of anti gun people out there base thier opinions on personal experiences involving guns. That would explain the "just get rid of them" cries without supporting any other solutions/options. I mean if that's the case you certainly can't blame them.

Have you noticed that no one agrees with you about anything you have said?

The thread with the actual real debates was deleted. But you are very very very off about me. I AM a gun owner. Its about banning guns like assault rifles so I dont need to get one to be armed like the crazy fearful people.

People thinking guns will be banned are amongst the dumbest in this country if you havent noticed. NObama and "dont take my guns" stickers are never on BMWs, they are always on piece of shit trucks. I wonder why.

I suspect that a lot of anti gun people out there base thier opinions on personal experiences involving guns. That would explain the "just get rid of them" cries without supporting any other solutions/options. I mean if that's the case you certainly can't blame them.

Who's really doing that, though? I can think of two, including the guy that started the thread. Literally everyone else being looped wholesale into this "socialists that want to confiscate all guns" group aren't out to ban all guns, or repeal the second amendment. I don't really know why I'm bothering to point this out, because I'm probably the 16th person to do so, yet the "your solution to take away all guns is foolish and evil" drumbeat continues. Perhaps the thread title is perpetuating this cognitive dissonance.

I used to own a gun; I carried it everywhere I went for a while. I knew how to use it. I'm reasonably sure I could hit somebody from 20 feet away. I thought I was safer for having a gun. Incidentally, I was also way fucked up in many areas of my life at the time. Eventually, I realized that I was no safer, and actually less safe, with a gun. Eventually, I realized that living life in fear of everyone and everything would keep me no safer, that there is a difference between reasonable vigilance and living under the cloak of paranoia. Eventually, I became pregnant, and that sealed the deal: enough of this gun bullshit.

I know many feel safer with guns; I was once in that camp. More power to them, at least in attitude. But the last thing many of 'them' need is more actual firepower. Nobody needs to fire a weapon 30 to 100 rounds at a time. Nobody needs a weapon right now, after never having had one. Nobody needs 80 to 100 guns. But damned if they'll keep throwing mental health care and video games at the rest of us at the mere suggestion that we discuss it.

If you want to know specifics, then you'll spend the rest of your life doing case research, since there are tens of thousands of accidental gun deaths per year in the US. So, no, it doesn't really matter to me, whether one wants to play the "people kill people" game or not. There's a responsible way to store and handle guns; if only everyone took it seriously. Guns are the common denominator in all sorts of deadly trends within this great country of ours. So, regale me all you want about the ease which which you could slit my throat or hit me in the head with a hammer, or how bad of a shot you are, but guns are inescapably part of the problem. The NRA and their allies will therefore throw everything against the wall as a possible solution (including suggestions of what they would otherwise call socialized medicine, and banning of certain entertainment media at the expense of their otherwise cherished first amendment rights), so long as nobody comes near the subject of gun regulation.

Just pointing out if someone wants you gone who knows what they'll resort to. Believe it or not some psycho's out there prefer knives over guns. . Some people do thier best to keep thier hands clean and recruit/ hire people to do it.

Who's really doing that, though? I can think of two, including the guy that started the thread. Literally everyone else being looped wholesale into this "socialists that want to confiscate all guns" group aren't out to ban all guns, or repeal the second amendment. I don't really know why I'm bothering to point this out, because I'm probably the 16th person to do so, yet the "your solution to take away all guns is foolish and evil" drumbeat continues. Perhaps the thread title is perpetuating this cognitive dissonance.

I used to own a gun; I carried it everywhere I went for a while. I knew how to use it. I'm reasonably sure I could hit somebody from 20 feet away. I thought I was safer for having a gun. Incidentally, I was also way fucked up in many areas of my life at the time. Eventually, I realized that I was no safer, and actually less safe, with a gun. Eventually, I realized that living life in fear of everyone and everything would keep me no safer, that there is a difference between reasonable vigilance and living under the cloak of paranoia. Eventually, I became pregnant, and that sealed the deal: enough of this gun bullshit.

I know many feel safer with guns; I was once in that camp. More power to them, at least in attitude. But the last thing many of 'them' need is more actual firepower. Nobody needs to fire a weapon 30 to 100 rounds at a time. Nobody needs a weapon right now, after never having had one. Nobody needs 80 to 100 guns. But damned if they'll keep throwing mental health care and video games at the rest of us at the mere suggestion that we discuss it.

Even when they are running, darting and dodging? You're good. Gun collectors might want to have a word with you on the gun count issue as well.

Have you noticed that no one agrees with you about anything you have said?

The thread with the actual real debates was deleted. But you are very very very off about me. I AM a gun owner. Its about banning guns like assault rifles so I dont need to get one to be armed like the crazy fearful people.

People thinking guns will be banned are amongst the dumbest in this country if you havent noticed. NObama and "dont take my guns" stickers are never on BMWs, they are always on piece of shit trucks. I wonder why.

It's pretty obvious that you base your opinions and arguments off of statistics that you look up, and what you've learned from the evening and internet news. You're out of your element when it comes to street smarts. FYI numbers don't always the whole story and the media only tells you what they want you to believe. Yea, let gangs kill each other off and anyone else who wanders into the line of fire. Gangs branch out into smaller cities and suburbs, as a matter of fact gangs also branch out into other states. It's becoming increasingly more difficult to avoid gang violence. What were once nice peacful neighborhoods are now nothing but extremely violent danger zones.

You need to come out from behind your computer, go outdoors and see what's really goin on out here.

Don't worry no one's gonna waste a bullet on your dumb ass.

some more FYI, Takes like 5 minutes for a gang memeber or someone with connections to a gang to get a gun in chicago . Probably gonna cost you a nice price to get one, but the again that's thru illegal methods.

lovestoswallow wrote:

You sound like a small town backwater redneck inbred. Go out and get some sun. Clearly, you do spend too much time on a computer. Nerd rage much? Jeff Fort may be in prison but the gang of 20,000 + memebers that he founded are still runnin around shooting innocent people numb nuts.

Seriously,don't shoot i'm on your side.

have some cake

I see I am dealing with someone who doesn't even remember what they have typed. I feel dumber for having entertained you and your foolish ramblings.

Are you finished being a chicken shit and responding in this cowardly way rather than making counterpoints?

. Not sure what this means or what you're saying. Pickled eggs are nasty. Try canned eggs.

Magical_felix wrote:

Can you explain how someone can kill 20 people in 10 minutes with a knife? Since this is why the gun debates about banning assault rifles started.

I hate to be the douche that debates this point. Gun vs knife- the gun will win 4 of 5 times. Guns make it easy for bad people to do bad things. Can a crazy do as much with a knife? Yeah he/she could, if that person was highly skilled and had a plan. Which is why guns are more deadly. Which is why guns need to be strongly regulated(by the people). Which is why owning guns for the wrong reason makes you a dumbass. Guns are not made for sport or recreation. They were made in history's mad rush to find the best killing weapon. Before the first Matchlock rifle was made people used bows, spears, and melee weapons. Then the Flintlock with a rifled barrel increased distance and accuracy. Next the contained cartridge increased rate of fire. Then things exploded! Trapdoor, (single shot)Bolt, lever/pump, semi-auto, and machine gun.

Guns don't kill people.- Well slow clap for you. That can be said about 90% of all man made things: knives, bows, cars, roller skates, and dental floss. People kill people. People made guns to kill people faster. I own guns so that bad people won't kill me. More people with guns (CHL, CCP, CCW) would turn the place into a blood bath.- No simple child it won't. If I went and got me a CHL. I would not turn into Yosemite Sam. In fact the training and knowledge that comes with the class would make me a better gun owner.

I hate to be the douche that debates this point. Gun vs knife- the gun will win 4 of 5 times. Guns make it easy for bad people to do bad things. Can a crazy do as much with a knife? Yeah he/she could, if that person was highly skilled and had a plan.

20% of the time, a knife beats a gun? What do you base this on? Sure, maybe Rambo can kill more people with a knife. But he's not real.

A knife is probably better for a stealth attack if you don't want to get caught. Less noise. But if we're talking multiple victims, I don't see how a knife is better. Especially if both the knife holder, and the gun holder are "highly skilled, and have a plan." It's just hard to take out multiple people from distance with a knife. Sure, you could throw it, but carrying around a bag of 50 knives is going to slow you down a helluva lot, making you far easier to avoid and/or stop.

I still say that banning guns or some types of guns or high capacity clips/magazines is just treating the symptoms of the problem. People, especially younger people, are becoming less and less able to socialize and interact with life as a whole. Is it the internet and ease of fulfulling almost all of our needs remotely? We can buy books, music, food, clothes, fulfill our sexual desires.. everything from the internet without really learning how to deal with people.

I do think the media and tv/movies are mostly to blame. Some people will say that none of that matters, I disagree. On one hand we have "experts" saying that television violence doesn't have any affect on the psyches of viewers. On the other hand we have banned/discouraged television show and most movies from even showing anyone smoking cigarettes, because it encourages teens to smoke. Well, which is it? Do images on tv/movies lead us to copy that behavior or not? I think they do. Companies spend billions of dollars every year advertising their products on tv, getting product placement in shows. Why? Because people are cattle and anything they see on television becomes real and acceptable. If seeing something on tv didn't affect the habits of viewers then no one would spend $1million+ for a 30 second ad during the Super Bowl.

We hear all the time that Hollywood is giving teenage girls an impossible image to live up to. Actresses and models are way to skinny and the typical American girl can't maintain the same bodies. Again, tv and movies portrayal of things influences people. Except for when it comes to violence. In the case of violence, the more the better.

In days past, law enforcement and media would often filter or downplay violence on tv and in newspapers for fear of copycat crimes. No such responsible thinking exists in today's media. It's all about ratings and nothing to do with informing the public.

When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser. Socrates

If only it were harder for Jack to get a gun, you wouldn't be so terrorized.

Hey, I know: join a gang. Rub shoulders with the next Ghaddafi, get bigger guns. Then Jack is no threat.

Well, jack was one of three gang members that ventured into a non gang area with the sole purpose of causing some trouble. There were a lot of people running and ducking behind parked cars once the shooting started. One person was shot in the hand because he was in a vulnerable position ( sitting on his parked motorcycle) but no one died from this particular incident. So, As you can see, not everybody dies evry time theres a shooting. But, it probably only took jack 5 minutes to get that gun and he was probably way ahead of me in the armements department as well.

If you would have been there with your hand cannon, would you have returned fire LadyX? or would you have with ran with the rest of us?

You cannot post new topics in this forum.
You cannot reply to topics in this forum.
You cannot delete your posts in this forum.
You cannot edit your posts in this forum.
You cannot create polls in this forum.
You cannot vote in polls in this forum.